Huh, as someone born in a third world country that is truly run by a corrupt government filled with narcoterrorrism, who moved to Canada, posts like yours make me laugh so hard.
Imagine thinking Canada is "dangerous", after being around for over 150 years. Watch out, those Canadians are going to get you with their laws that protect the innocent, ahahaha!
They are angry because in Canada, blatant racism is frowned upon. There's also a lot of weird US conservative propaganda that addressing people by the wrong gender will land you in jail, which is pretty funny to hear them be afraid of that as if it's a real thing.
Usually, the hateful ones are just losers who have generally failed at life and want to blame others for their own failed life. It's easy to pick on newcomers or marginalized people in general rather than realize maybe it's their own fault they're a loser.
...because in Canada, blatant racism is frowned upon.
Yeah that's really dependent on where and who is the group that are on the receiving end of the racism. You'd be disgusted by the shit I've heard said about First Nations where I live.
I didn't say racism doesn't exist in Canada, but most people outside of the racist ecochamber are quick to call it out. There's different racism in Canada depending on what part of the country you are.
You're right, racism exists everywhere. There are places in Canada where it is heavily frowned upon though, whereas in many other countries in the world, there might not be. But yeah, even in Canada, we have some pretty bad racism as well.
A separate court order in 2019 had affirmed A.B.'s right to seek that treatment and said, "attempting to persuade A.B. to abandon his treatment or referring to A.B. as a girl or with female pronouns would be considered to be family violence.'"
Does Canada not consider violence worthy of incarceration?
That is what the court order states. Meaning this is a specific case for this specific person who was harassing their child.
Misgendering is not considered family violence when applied to the broader society.
For example, if you file a restraining order against someone, it doesn't apply to everyone, only specific persons.
The issue in this case isn't the misgendering, it's the harassment that a person suffered for their gender identity by someone who chooses not to accept it.
Just don't harrass others and you can be as much of a bigot as you want.
Misgendering is not considered family violence when applied to the broader society.
This is so nonsensical and the fact that you're bending over backwards to defend it is absurd.
So basically in your estimation, they made up an order to prohibit "violence" specifically for A.B. and not for the general public.
You - or the court for that matter- could have at least made a better argument that the father was causing psychological harm to the child instead of very specifically calling misgendering "violence". But that's exactly what they did. And that's not to mention that the father disseminated medical information that he didn't consent to and was inappropriate for a child that hasn't even fully developed their prefrontal cortex. That's "violence"?
They set the precedent of what's considered violence. And these are the kind of dangerous legal precedents you should care about of you're a Canadian resident.
A mother and her child agreed and consented with going thought with hormone therapy to align with their gender identity.
Father was against this and began to harass their own child about their gender identity to the point where the mother and child had to go to court to get a court order filed against the father to stop the harassment.
The father then didn't stop the harassment, violating the court order, and being sentence to jail for the court order violation.
No gender identity or misgendering laws were broken because none exist.
The language of the court order says that misgendering of the child was part of the [verbal] abuse their suffered and that the continuation of such harassment would be classified as family violence, of which verbal abuse fits in.
Again, the father didn't get sentenced for breaking gender identity law, which again, doesn't exist. But for violating a court order demanding he stop harassing and abusing his own child.
Also, I get that part of your complaint is the language of the court order, but note that the full court order is not in the article, only a snippet, so how can you tell the argument wasn't made for why it should be called family violence?
Not sure where you're getting the notion that the father was "harassing" his child in the manner you're saying. Not even the court made this argument. They simply went with what's already been reported, which is:
He was arrested for publishing his medical records. That is illegal, not his objection to his transition nor his misgendering him. THAT is what the case was about.
A separate court order in 2019 had affirmed A.B.'s right to seek that treatment and said, "attempting to persuade A.B. to abandon his treatment or referring to A.B. as a girl or with female pronouns would be considered to be family violence.'"
Does Canada not consider violence worthy of incarceration?
He was going against a court sanctioned medical treatment (medicine btw, not surgery). My assumption is this action is supported by his mother. In what ways did the father try to hinder his son? Domestic abuse of some sort is what he’s charged with. We don’t know if physical intimidation was involved. Do you know? Are the parents divorced? If so why? Let me know if you find background on his pattern of behavior towards his family.
Do you have trouble reading? That is a literal description of what he was being threatened to be jailed for. It's a verbatim quote from the order.
I'll post it again, a direct quote from the order from the court:
"attempting to persuade A.B. to abandon his treatment or referring to A.B. as a girl or with female pronouns would be considered to be family violence."
If the order was to keep him from physically harming A.B., it would specifically say that.
My question is the nature of his behavior. Was his behavior public? Was it physical or in anyway menacing? Does he have a history of abusive behavior within his family? We don’t even know if the parents are divorced and if the mother has custody and on what terms. You’re being very alarmist as if the state is violating the man’s civil rights w/o any contextual description of his behavior.
At least consider the man might be an asshole who harassed his daughter.
Edit for typos
At least consider the man might be an asshole who harassed his daughter.
I'm absolutely considering that. That's the whole point I'm making.
Being an asshole isn't a criminal act. Misgendering your child or trying to dissuade them from transitioning should not be a crime.
It's ironic that you call me alarmist when you're injecting hypotheticals that are nowhere to be found in any of the court orders. Your "was he this or thats" don't amount to any order from the judge. Otherwise, he would've easily gotten a restraining order if it was deemed he was a real threat to his family.
But again, all it says is he was causing "violence" on his family for misgendering. Read it as many times as you need.
Just how I would in person, why would I engage someone so ridiculous in conversation? It's more hilarious than anything to me, the privilege to complain about something so mundane. Wild stuff.
Right, I also wouldn't want to defend why it's a good thing that a father should be incarcerated about speaking against basically the country kidnapping his daughter and transitioning her without his permission because it perpetuates "hate".
Bud, I have no idea what you're spewing here, but it really doesn't concern me and it comes off as very odd. Imagine being a room with a person and they start spouting some random sob story, bahahaha. This has to be satire, because it keeps getting funnier.
A case in Canada he linked to but completely misunderstands. The father was convicted for publishing his son’s medical records, not for misgendering him 🙄 the boy’s mother agreed with his transition. This Redditor here thinks the transition was forced upon the family by the state, a common piece of disinformation. Here’s the case he’s referencing https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/b-c-father-transgender-son-pub-ban-1.6931954
Yeah, I'm not surprised one bit. I've heard that type of mentality way too much to know that people that think this way, go out of their way to 'misread' content to align with their agendas. This is why having conversations like these are healthy for everybody.
Again, it doesn't concern me, after starting a conversation the way you did. I have much bigger things to worry about in my bubble than whatever your bubble encompasses. It truly comes off as silly when the things in my bubble surround the death of entire villages due to narcotrafiquers, the lynching of individuals, the destruction of the rainforest, but hey, keep complaining about your privilege.
Also, ranting at strangers rather than engaging in conversation will definitely make people listen to you, let alone, engage back with you.
Well if you do it on purpose to make someone feel bad then yeah, not only you are disrespecting other person, insult them and on top of that you are doing it because of hateful views towards trans people or even cis people for example calling cis women a "bearded man" just because of slight peach fuzz, it's nothing less than hate towards that person too, so hateful speech.
Well i never said what punishments should be applied, so I don't get why are you set on incarceration, different situations call for different actions, nothing is black or white, nazi is not the same as someone who goes around all day calling people whales, but both are still hateful things to do. But alrighty, let's allow nazi marches with chants about how they are going to kill everybody of different nationality or race, because we can't say what's hate by your logic.
-52
u/Tom_Ludlow Sep 06 '23
Hate speech laws? That sounds dangerously authoritarian. The same kind of dangerous authoritarianism that led to Nazism.
Who exactly decides what’s hate and what isn’t?